2018 (2) TMI 1440

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssee-Appellants were engaged in the manufacture of paper boxes and wrappers/packing material which attracts Central Excise Duty. They were also availing the SSI Exemption as per the Notification No. 8/2003 dated 01.03.2003 and it is stated that there was no requirement to obtain the Central Excise registration. The Department has received the information that the assessee-Appellants have already exhausted the SSI limit of Rs. 1 crore, but are preparing the bills/vouchers by showing the lower value by 25 to 50%. So, a search was conducted at the business premises of the assessee on 29.03.2007. The statements of their employee, Ku. Hemlata and Shri Satish Goyal, Director, were recorded at the time of search. From the computers, the details of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....art prepared by the Department is nothing but a chart of production planning. It is not a chart of actual production or sale. The Department has failed to show any computer entry. Nowhere in her statement, Kum. Hemlata has stated that bills were quantified 25-100% amount on the request of the party or the direction of the Director. The finished goods were not available. Hence, penalty is not leviable. The turnover was within the prescribed SSI limit. No cross-examination was allowed by the Department. The penalty on the Director is also without any reason. To support her argument, she relied upon the ratio laid down in the case of : (i) CCE, Puducherry vs SAR Ispat Pvt. Ltd., 2017 (6) TMI 901 (T-Chennai); (ii) Ashutosh Metal Indus. Vs C....